Is conserved water fueling overgrowth?

Water authorities tell us to conserve due to shortages while
they continue making commitments to serve new development. Some
agricultural users face 30 percent cutbacks in January, yet growth
marches on. Water derived from cutbacks is apparently considered
"surplus" for growth. If additional supplies are not developed,
each new house added increases the point at which we will face
future cutbacks.

Growers are already impacted by heavy price competition from
foreign imports, like avocados from Mexico. It is no wonder the San
Diego County Water Authority's
water management
plan
projects a 42 percent reduction in agriculture by 2030
"primarily due to conversion to housing."

Reservoirs were supposedly built to provide emergency backup for
existing customers during droughts, plus some capacity for growth.
But during shortages the question arises how they separate the
backup water from that designated for development. Theoretically,
existing customers should not have to cut back in dry years -
unless their water is used for new customers.

Why not ration new development along with everyone else? Some
water officials respond that denying new hookups at this time would
be unfair to the plans of developers since the present shortage is
considered temporary. Indications are, however, the opposite is
true: The Colorado River is in its eighth year of drought. The
Sierra snowpack is only 40 percent of normal and has been
diminishing for years. Environmental problems plague our northern
delivery system. Climate change is now taken seriously. This area
is experiencing a historic drought. Another water official says,
"This could be the beginning of a long-term shift" in water
resources.

Plans to develop additional water like desalination are
uncertain and far in the future. A proposed new canal from the
north to increase supplies would take more than 20 years to
complete - if the bond passes (it was defeated once). Same story
for new reservoirs.

Metropolitan Water District - our major supplier - was hit in
2003 with a 50 percent cutback in its Colorado River allotment due
to states upriver exercising seniority rights. California's share
was reduced from 1,212,000 acre-feet per year to 606,000 acre-feet
per year. The San Diego County Water Authority signed subsequent
contracts for an additional 277,700 acre-feet per year, but
California still ends up 328,300 acre-feet per year short of its
original allotment. (An acre-foot serves two homes/eight
people.)

Metropolitan also receives water from the State Water Project.
However, our San Diego County Water Authority has been routinely
overdrawing its 15.8 percent legal entitlement from this source (25
percent in 2004), but since there are districts in the Los Angeles
area that have not yet reached full build-out, this has not been an
issue. It's something for future generations to deal with.

Until our water authorities base their new commitments on an
actual - legally sound - surplus we will continue to subsidize new
development while we experience rationing, reduced use forced by
rate increases, cost-prohibitive landscaping and a gradual decline
in agriculture.

Growth clearly has priority over existing residents.

- Fallbrook resident Glenn Carroll was a director for the
Tuolumne Utilities District for four years.